Gates: Bombing Iran won’t stop them from getting nukes

posted at 6:17 pm on April 30, 2009 by Allahpundit

Gates told a Senate panel that a military option would only delay Iran’s nuclear ambitions and drive the program further underground, making it more difficult to monitor, he said.

He said the better option would be for the United States and its allies to convince Iran that building a nuclear program would start an arms race that would leave the country less secure.

“Their security interests are actually badly served by trying to have nuclear weapons,” Gates said. “They will start a nuclear arms race in the Middle East and they will be less secure at the end than they are now.”…

Clinton and Gates told the panel the United States and its allies should pressure Iran with tougher sanctions.

Reminds me of that DA in California announcing publicly that he won’t prosecute people for misdemeanors anymore. I’m sitting here trying to figure out how it’s a good idea for Gates to admit this, but I’m stumped: Even if it’s a bluff and the Pentagon does think it can stop the program, what do we gain by telling Iran we can’t? It doesn’t give us any extra leverage during negotiations. And is he kidding about convincing them that nukes aren’t in their best interest? The risk of a Middle East arms race was long ago priced into their decision to go nuclear, as was the endless sanctions dance in the UN. Short of Obama threatening to actually give nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia and Iraq to check the Iranian threat, what’s left to discuss except buying them off somehow? It’s all carrot, no stick.

Speaking of negotiating with enemies, see for yourself how much the big photo op with Chavez did to change his disposition towards us.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Well then theres our point of disagreement I suppose. There’s no need to telegraph one’s eagerness to go to war. The world knows that should talks break down and a more serious confrontation emerge, that the United States will defend itself.

Except that Gates just notified the world that we lack the capability to stop the nuclear program militarily. We’re not at a disagreement over whether you should telegraph an eagerness to go to war. But you don’t reveal your weaknesses to your adversary.

This was the premise behind most of our nuclear talks with Russia throughout the modern presidencies. Theres a time for the more aggressive posture you favor, but some would argue that the time for that is only clear once other more palatable options have been tried and found unsuccessful.

War is all a matter of moral. You win when the enemy lacks the will to fight.
That doesn’t usually mean that they no longer have any live bodies with which to experience said will, but it goes quicker if they believe that you find that outcome acceptable.

all of you are getting too angry and are starting up again with the name calling.. i got angry in an ealier thread today and wished for some very nasty things to happen to those that sit in the white house and was told that i should work harder and to just pray that liberal policies fail.

He said the better option would be for the United States and its allies to convince Iran that building a nuclear program would start an arms race that would leave the country less secure.

Ahmadinejad’s Shia End Times belief system calls for him to hasten the return of the Madhi/12th Imam. In order to do this he must create havoc on Earth. We take his threats to annihilate Israel and America far too lightly. This is not a rational leader seeking to gain weapons that would ensure his country’s security.

This could be an attempt by Gates to publicly warn Israel (who are currently wargaming a military strike against Iran) that a nuclear Iran is a foregone conclusion and a strike by them would not be, from the administration’s point of view, prudent.

amerpundit on April 30, 2009 at 6:59 PM
Alana on April 30, 2009 at 7:03 PM

Luckily for us theres a national security apparatus that exists outside of the office of the president. But aside from the obvious, i think amerpundit’s reading too much from this one statement. If anything, he’s aluding to the fact that theres no “run and gun” quick strike answer to this problem. Sure militarily we can stop them, but it would require all out war and regime change. Gates knows this, the world knows this, and this is what i was talking about in my prior post. But theres no need to go into negotiations waving around threats of utter destruction, at least not now.

If Obama chose to drill for oil in US , the strategic risks would be almost minimal.

the_nile on April 30, 2009 at 6:41 PM

That is never going to happen.

upinak on April 30, 2009 at 6:41 PM

Israel nukes Iran – Texas will succede about 5 minutes later…
Then it becomes a matter of survival…Forget your cap & trade,
forget your nationlized health care. Then it will be about real men
stepping up, not a metro-sexual, impotent, Marxist president and his
“swagga”…..

If your Secretary of Defense does not believe the United States of America can destroy 12-14 shielded targets, then I fear for you much more than I fear for my own country.. Because we can do it and this outpouring of weakness is an international embarassment from the world’s sole superpower..

If this is indeed the extent of America’s capabilities, then your Sec Def has just invited every 2 bit piece of crap on the planet to attack you.

Israel nukes Iran – Texas will succede about 5 minutes later…
Then it becomes a matter of survival…Forget your cap & trade,
forget your nationlized health care. Then it will be about real men
stepping up, not a metro-sexual, impotent, Marxist president and his
“swagga”…..

Talks on Iranian corridor for US troops, supplies to Afghanistan on fast track.

From DEBKA-Net-Weekly updated by DEBKAfile

April 28, 2009, 8:40 PM (GMT+02:00)

On March 27, DEBKA-Net-Weekly 390 revealed exclusively Barack Obama’s plans “to transform the Khomeinist Islamic Republic’s clenched fist against America into a helping hand by formally asking Tehran to permit the passage to Afghanistan of fresh US troops, weapons and supplies across Iranian territory.”

In its follow-up of April 3, our military sources reported that US defense secretary Robert Gates, Chief of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen and transport command chief Gen. Duncan J. McNabb, have laid before the president a detailed plan, which had been cleared in back-door meetings between US and Iranian officers.

DEBKAfile’s sources ask how much leverage against Iran’s drive for a nuclear bomb will be left to Washington when the US becomes dependent on Tehran for its war supplies to Afghanistan.

If this pans out, it will be a triple win for Iraq. We are a lot less likely to do anything to them. We become dependent on them. They get to laugh while we become more LBJ quagmired in Afghanistan.

Is Gates on crack? The Iranian regime doesn’t want nuclear weapons to address its “security interests”. The ayatollahs and Ahmadinejad want nuclear weapons to exterminate the Jews and bring on Yawm ad-Din and the days of the Mahdi, Dajjal, and Isa.

Bob, let me help you in case you can’t scroll through five pages of text.

Quote:

On his addresses to the United Nations, Ahmadinejad has also invoked the Mahdi. He ended his 2005 speech with a prayer: “O mighty lord, I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the Promised One, that perfect and pure human being, the One that will fill this world with justice and peace.” He was not referring to Barack Obama.

Ahmadinejad later recalled, “One of our group told me that when I started to say ‘In the name of God the almighty and merciful,’ he saw a light around me, and I was placed inside this aura. I felt it myself. I felt the atmosphere suddenly change, and for those 27 or 28 minutes, the leaders of the world did not blink… And they were rapt. It seemed as if a hand was holding them there and had opened their eyes to receive the message from the Islamic republic.”

Ahmadinejad has also stated his intention to wipe Israel “off the map,” but he doesn’t stop there. He also says that “the Imam gave him the presidency for a single task: provoking a ‘clash of the civilizations’ in which the Muslim world, led by Iran, takes on the ‘infidel’ West, led by the United States, and defeats it.”

For those who take Ahmadinejad’s apocalyptic statements seriously, it is disturbing to think that a man who believes that he is called by Allah to sow chaos and destruction in the world may one day soon have nuclear weapons at his command. As Ayatollah Khamenei said, “It is the mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to erase Israel from the map of the region.”

(emphasis mine)

I’d stamp it on your forehead if I could slip into the Pentagon unnoticed.

Sorry. Disagree. Exo-atmosphere gamma rays produce the Compton-effect electrons needed for strong EMP effect. Too many molecules at 30 miles up. The resulting field strength is low and the 5 nanosecond rise time is attenuated.

If we use nucs, much better to go with ground penetrators and use blast effects of underground explosion.

Give nukes to the Saudis? I’d prefer to give nukes to the Iranians. About two on each of their cities should do it. Allowing them to proceed because we prefer to get them to like us is insane and suicidal.

I’m sitting here trying to figure out how it’s a good idea for Gates to admit this, but I’m stumped: Even if it’s a bluff and the Pentagon does think it can stop the program, what do we gain by telling Iran we can’t?

You are confused because you think the message is for Iran. The message for Israel. It is an answer to Israel’s demand that we stop Iran’s nuclear program before they negotiate with the Palestinians. The Obama Administration will not use force against Iran. They are clearly saying we won’t meet Israel’s demand.

The Obama Administration does not care if Iran acquires nuclear weapons. (I doubt that very many Democrats do care.) From the Administrations point of view, there are some advantages if Iran acquires them. It will make Israel more vulnerable; therefore, the Israelis will depend on us more; therefore, we will have more leverage with Israel to force concessions on the Palestinian question.

One thought for those posters who are trashing SecDef Gates. Robert Gates is only as good, or as bad, as the man who leads him. I did not think he was a very good CIA head under Bush-I. He tried to get President Clinton to retain him (and failed). He did very well as SecDef under Bush-II. I think he will do whatever his leader wants him to do. If the President wants him to implement strong policies, he will do that. If the President wants him to implement weak policies, he will do that also. No complaints. He likes being in the top ranks of government. Perhaps he is not very principled in that regard, but he appears to be a loyal lieutenant to anybody he serves.

As for Secretary Gates, a good and decent man, knows Russia, or the former Soviet Union, which is how he made his bones. Not so much a globalist visionary. Not a bad administrator, was tolerable but cautious when he was DCI. Yes, he is tasked with carrying out the directives of the President, so he will not be one to go it alone. From personal observation, Gates never had a reputation of bolting from the starting gate. But, he is a cautious to a fault. In much the same way as a General Meade, McClellan or Burnside.

That said, if this message was indeed intended for Israel…what does that say about the present bi-lateral relationship between the government of the United States and the government of Israel?

In the past, in 1973, for example, and in the Lebanon incursion of 1982, et al., we were able to lean on Israel in private, not in a public forum. This is how things are normally accomplished, whether Israel, or Russia or China, and among our allies, if the realtionship is healthy. Gives the other guy wiggle room, saves face, and for both overseas and domestic audiences is prevents that old “lackey” of the United States label being applied. Which is more important then most understand.

Given Netanyahui’s recent statements, I’d imagine that the old relationship is gone…probably not even at the working level anymore either…and in a very short period of time.

So, if Gates intended this message for Israel, then perhaps we are at greater risk than we might care to think about.

News flash…there already is an arms race in the middle east! World War III is coming close to being inevitable. Just wait until Iran has their version of a Rieshstag fire as an excuse to start a war direct war with Israel.

Sigh. Last I checked, nuclear weapons were part of our military arsenal. Hit Iran with as many ICBM’s as it takes. It’s hard to build nukes when you and everyone around is dead.

We are going to nuke the Islamic world eventually. It’s inevitable. And has been for decades. Islam is incompatible with civilization. Conflict to the death is the only possible endgame. So it’s better to do it now to keep our casualties down.

No its not, we don’t have any need to attack Khamenei’s pride and joy directly, we just need to make life miserable enough that the anti nuke libs finally institute their own Hope n Change, Iranian style.

If only the CIA weren’t undergoing Church II, The most intelligent Pres. in the world might would have left himself some room to run instead of being clutsy enough to stick his foot under the lawn mower and then stick the Sec. Def. with the, oh God its too late, lets give up speech.

Besides its always been Syria, Syria, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, Egypt and Iran, even Putin and Beijing, all with a quantum improvement with Assad brought to heel.

Gates never has been worth a crap. He’s been tanning in the glow of other people’s hard work all along. That’s why Barry kept him. All Gates is there for is to cash in on the book circuit. Barry is just all about destroying this country’s military and intelligence community. All about it.

Amazing. Arms race? Less secure? Are they still trying to apply 21st century logic to a 12th century lunatic? Why? Is there no one in any position of power that sees beyond moronic talking points and wishful thinking?
Iran wants nukes to bomb Israel and probably us. There is no “deterrent” to that.

Ogabe isn’t even serious about “sanctions” against Iran. He’s paying lip service to that concept to buy time for Iran to finish their work. Israel must save itself again, without any help from the US. I pray that God hasn’t turned His back on them.

Y’know, a gloves off tooth and nail meat grinder might be better than this slow trickle towards socialized sharia. Might wake America up like Pearl Harbor did, and get us back on course. If nothing else it would shut the islamokooks up for another 50 or 60 years.

Ronald Reagan – Conservative Superhero – the many who invisioned the STRATEGIC DEFENSE INITIATIVE – which was ridiculed by the Democrats (specifically Ted Kennedy, who mockingly deemed it “STAR WARS”)

They said it would never be doable – but Reagan was right. And thanks to the fact that Republican Presidents FUNDED the research while Bill Clinton cut back on it – Obama has another tool in his toolbox called MISSILE DEFENSE.

You will not stop Iran from getting nukes. No matter what. Attacking them won’t help (but it would feel damn good!). Negotiating won’t work. They are bound and determined to get them.

So DEAL WITH IT.

What Obama can do, is this …

Y.A.D.

“Your Assured Destruction”

This policy would tell Iran this …

FIRE A NUKE – WE WILL SHOOT IT DOWN.

AND WE WILL THEN PAVE YOUR COUNTRY WITH OUR NUKES – NO QUESTIONS ASKED.

This tells Iran there is little to be gained in firing a nuke. Even though they will get nukes soon – it will be decades before they have LOTS OF THEM. And you need LOTS OF THEM to defeat Missile Defense. By that time – even Missile Defense Technology will be improved enough to deal with LOTS OF THEM.

MISSILE DEFENSE – is the way to go – as long as Obama doesn’t CUT FUNDING FOR IT – which he promised to do in the campaign and has even hinted at now that he’s Presidente.

RONALD REAGAN – WORKING MIRACLES FROM THE GRAVE TO BAIL OUT LIBERAL PRESIDENTS.

I’m sitting here trying to figure out how it’s a good idea for Gates to admit this, but I’m stumped

Part of trying to soften the greatest blow to American prestige since the British burned the White House in 1814, and that was just an humiliation: This will be a “game-changing” acquisition of nuclear weapons by a hostile power in the world’s most unstable region, to the detriment of our historical ally, that we have repeatedly and publically, through top leaders of both parties, declared “unacceptable.”

As much as it disgusts me, this is the most sober analysis on the topic I have recently read, the US will claim hollow shallow / victory in return for no real suspension of Iran’s program, just more BS assurances – Just like North Korea, even more shameful some of our pundits may put up pictures of ‘exploding infrastructure’ also a la NOKO and buttress this hollow bull as some form of Obama victory – while in reality it is business as usual.

In the mean time America will give up the farm, bow to radical Islam and wait for the 1st Islamic bombs to go off.. Hopefully somewhere else, which is a deluded as this strategy.